Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The riddle

  1. Mar 25, 2003 #1
    if i can't get a reasonable answer on the origin of the universe, world, everything, i should go back one step and question the question.
    any question is human brain made; man developed along evolution of living things.
    you might thus suspect that human capacity to enquire is due to his original curiosity for his living surroundings, due to survival in a ferocious or unfriendly world.
    man's property to question anything due to the possibility, nature offered our primate ancestors, to do so.
    so, the possibility of "man thinking" must have been there in nature before "man doing first think" really happened. (though i believe that there was no first time literally, but a history of development)
    "nature itself" allows "man thinking" to happen under given conditions.
    the root of "questioning anything" is assertion, survival, laws of evolution, - was maybe ancient man's only chance to persist and still be here now.
    this root of quest and inquiry might be aswell its own (system-immanent) limit.
    in that way, that we can question anything except what gave us this capacity,
    ..question anything except the very creator of "question, ask, enquire, fancy, imagine, think, wonder, stupefaction, riddle".
    all our basic hurdles of knowledge come together in the origins of man's brain with capacity to question, to enquire, stupefaction, wondering about outer world, giving it a rhime. (lateron putting all such in form of names and speech)

    so.. what's our elementary ways of thinking:
    - cause and effect
    - overview the whole
    - relate things/events/processes/thoughts/being/anything to one
    - locate anything in space and time
    - judge anything as what it is by its perceived properties and
    - ..
    further (work on the elements above by..):
    - admit for constant change
    - sort facts from belief and check them over again
    - induce, deduce
    - make abstractions, put things in order
    - find hierarchy and systematics of things/evt/procs, or sort them by
    - compare new perceptions with known ones
    - define anything by giving/calling *.* it names
    - interpret found reality on its meaning, necessity, usability for us
    - ..

    knowledge starts with the origin of thinking in evolution of man's brain, - before, there is none. not in history of evolution, not in science, not in language and speech, not in notions of anything. (to me, the same goes even for reality, nature of "being" the way we look upon it ..for what else is our reality, our way of thinking: "being", than brain-made)

    so.. if we insist on finding out about evolution's, nature's, world's, origin, we should maybe question exactly this phenomenon of
    "the nature of evolution offering man the capacity of thinking (talent of feeling?): what? why? how?" (in its first appearances)
    finding out, what it was, that made nature do this to us, how it happened, what law bore this special evolution of man among evolution in general - a basic thing. studying the origins of thought in all its aspects might give us that blacksheet of the origins of "where we find no words and fail to see clear".
    what must world, the universe be like, to have this opportunity/possibility/circumstance inside?
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 25, 2003 #2
    Oh really, why is that? Why do you insist life must either make sense or we should question the question? To question the question itself is merely another way to insist that life must make sense.


    Great perfection can seem incomplete,
    But does not decay;
    Great abundance can seem empty,
    But does not fail.
    Great truth can seem contradictory;
    Great cleverness can seem stupid;
    Great eloquence can seem awkward;
    Great questions can seem foolish.
    As spring overcomes the cold,
    And autumn overcomes the heat,
    So calm and quiet overcome the world.
  4. Mar 25, 2003 #3
    i write: origin of the universe, of everything.
    and you read:
    sense of life.

    reasonable arguing utterly needs agreement on terms used.
    ..might aswell hunt peanutbutterflies, else..

    to me, curiosity, learning about unknown world is possible.
    ..encompass the unknown with knowledge *.* ..

    lovely poem, anyway..
    (fits in any PF-thread, though: Quiet's like a Joker that can be played anytime.)
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2003
  5. Mar 25, 2003 #4
    OK, then just replace the word "life" with "origin of the universe" if you prefer.

    If you want to see it that way, I suppose it is funny. :0)
  6. Mar 25, 2003 #5
    trying to find out, what nature must be like, to offer "thought" to humans,
    studying the ancient conditions of it happening,
    to you is basically the same like, ..or insisting on:
    was there a bigbang?
    what's the origin of everything?
    (and even:
    does life/anything really need to make sense?..
    if i got it right..?)

    ..if you see it that way, everything is like everything,
    ..and that gets us back to hunting butterflies by even using words,
    which would be another thread.

    but the way of approaching origin of everything by asking, what the conditions of brain and thought coming to existence were, seems more likely to me, to find an answer on, than:
    how did anything begin?
    why is there "world"?
    or universalties alike..
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2003
  7. Mar 25, 2003 #6
    It sounds like you are suggesting these are mutually exclusive persuits, which is just not the case. The way to discovery intimately involves acceptance. Most pointedly, acceptance of our ignorance. Without the objectivity acceptance brings to science it is retarded, but it still gets there anyway because that is the nature of nature. It may not make sense logically, but that is the way it is anyway. :0)
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2003
  8. Mar 25, 2003 #7
    i can't see your replies referring to my posted thread..(?)
    what is nature (evolution) like, to offer thought and capability to question anything to humans?
    was "thought" there in nature before man "doing think"?
    what prior conditions might we conclude for sth like that to happen?
    can we attribute any properties or characteristics to nature derived from "development of human thought happening"?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook